- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:21:40 -0400
- To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au, Matt May <mcmay@yahoo.com>
- Cc: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Jason,
This is the simplest and more reasonable list of priorities I've
seen yet! #1 should be "invisible" to other users, and #2 is more
important to most disabled folks, with #3 close on it's heals ...
Anne
At 09:42 AM 8/24/01 +1000, Jason White wrote:
>One proposal that takes into account recent discussion might be a
>conformance scheme along the following lines:
>
>1. Device and modality independence (guidelines 1 and 3), with a score
> indicating number of checkpoints satisfied. No claim can be made
> unless all priority 1 checkpoints have been implemented (because
> otherwise some parts of the content would be completely
> inaccessible).
>
>2. Ease of interaction and navigation (guideline 2), with a score as
> above. Again, to comply with this category at all it would be
> necessary to meet every priority 1 checkpoint.
>
>3. Ease of comprehension, with the same scoring system as above.
>
>Developers could claim that their content is accessible in one, two or
>all three of these dimensions.
Anne Pemberton
apembert@erols.com
http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2001 21:26:00 UTC